3 ms·

It's not overperforming per se. NASA spacecraft/probes have primary, secondary, and auxiliary missions. Everything on the probe is designed and built with an ey

It's not overperforming per se. NASA spacecraft/probes have primary, secondary, and auxiliary missions. Everything on the probe is designed and built with an eye to being able to complete secondary and auxiliary missions but the guarantee (insofar as anything can be) is the probe can accomplish its primary mission. Unfortunately this leads to uninformed reporters to make stupid claims like "a probe only designed to last 90 days...". There's no self destruct or planned obsolescence in NASA probes. They don't have an egg timer set to 90 days and then explode. The probes are designed to last at least as long as the ability for their consumables/power supply lasts. Consider the stresses of launch, transit through space, and insertion/landing are way worse than day to day conditions for a lot of probes. If they can survive all of that rolling around a desert is relatively easy (in comparison). If Ingenuity made one successful flight there was little reason it couldn't make more so long as it had the appropriate power available and the Martian Space Defense didn't shoot it down. Ingenuity didn't overperform, it performed according to its actual design and construction. It only overperformed misinformed media expectations.

wolverine876 3y ago
> this leads to uninformed reporters to make stupid claims like "a probe only designed to last 90 days...". C'mon let's not blame the reporters. NASA pushes this line - why do think everyone repeats it, using the same language almost every time? You can even see it here on HN.
- autoexec 3y ago
  If NASA says "We're going to send a helicopter to mars with the mission of taking 5 flights" is that somehow bad? If the quality of the engineering and the quality of the parts, and all the redundant systems and fail-safes required to absolutely guarantee that the helicopter will complete its mission of five flights then go on to allow the helicopter to take more flights before it finally breaks down, that isn't NASA lying to anyone or "pushing a line". If the media then tells the public that the helicopter was designed to make 5 flights, but got over 70 that's not misleading anyone.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    You're just making statements, with no argument behind them other than a strawperson or two (it's 'bad'). Anyway, the arguments seem to have all been said.
- giantrobot 3y ago
  NASA doesn't push that line. They say the primary mission is X flights or whatever. When the probe lasts longer reporters translate that into "designed to only last X flights!!1!" NASA never wants to say a probe will probably last longer than its primary mission because then reporters go the complete opposite direction and claim NASA said a "probe failed to last the claimed X+Y flights".

wolverine876 3y ago

> this leads to uninformed reporters to make stupid claims like "a probe only designed to last 90 days...". C'mon let's not blame the reporters. NASA pushes this line - why do think everyone repeats it, using the same language almost every time? You can even see it here on HN.

autoexec 3y ago
If NASA says "We're going to send a helicopter to mars with the mission of taking 5 flights" is that somehow bad? If the quality of the engineering and the quality of the parts, and all the redundant systems and fail-safes required to absolutely guarantee that the helicopter will complete its mission of five flights then go on to allow the helicopter to take more flights before it finally breaks down, that isn't NASA lying to anyone or "pushing a line". If the media then tells the public that the helicopter was designed to make 5 flights, but got over 70 that's not misleading anyone.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  You're just making statements, with no argument behind them other than a strawperson or two (it's 'bad'). Anyway, the arguments seem to have all been said.
giantrobot 3y ago
NASA doesn't push that line. They say the primary mission is X flights or whatever. When the probe lasts longer reporters translate that into "designed to only last X flights!!1!" NASA never wants to say a probe will probably last longer than its primary mission because then reporters go the complete opposite direction and claim NASA said a "probe failed to last the claimed X+Y flights".